Agreed 100% but in todays world, once someone is in handcuffs it hard to "unarrest" them. This is a proper way to do things, is my point and clearly this went wrong on the officers part, and only time will tell if the citizen had a fault too.

Just re-reading old posts and caught this...sorry. I wonder though if this could be solved? I mean, I hate to stick someone with more paperwork and all, but couldn't we just issue the officers another form for when they screw up(I know...who would report themselves right)? In such situation after realizing they arrested someone incorrectly they could say...fill out a form stating such and then cut the guy loose.

I don't see what the difficulty is. If you know you fouled up...OWN UP. I screw up at work from time to time and it gets fixed real quick, because if I don't lots of folks services or equipment don't work. Some of it being stuff that various LEO, MIL, and other various gubmint folks depend on from time to time. When it happens I call my boss and own up. Then we both sit down and fix it right there on the spot all the while apologizing profusely to the customer.

Seems like all this "hard to unarrest" stuff really boils down to is CYA. All this nonsense of letting the courts deal with something that should have never made it to the courts in the first place is nuts. Just a thought. I guess I'm still trying to wrap my head around why a knowledgeable supervisor can't make the call and say "sorry, we fouled up".

It will be interesting to see what the end result of that investigation is though. I would hope it was some sort of misunderstanding on both sides, but you never know anymore.

...In such situation after realizing they arrested someone incorrectly they could say...fill out a form stating such and then cut the guy loose.

I don't see what the difficulty is. ...

Seems like all this "hard to unarrest" stuff really boils down to is CYA. All this nonsense of letting the courts deal with something that should have never made it to the courts in the first place is nuts. Just a thought. I guess I'm still trying to wrap my head around why a knowledgeable supervisor can't make the call and say "sorry, we fouled up".

It will be interesting to see what the end result of that investigation is though. I would hope it was some sort of misunderstanding on both sides, but you never know anymore.

packin' I agree with you. I read through this thread to day too and when I saw SIXTO's 'hard to unarrest' comment it reminded me of a post on another thread that the initial detainment was just a precaution while LE performed some on scene investigating. Like you, it seems that upon completion of the "investigating" a reconsidering of the charges (more?, less?, none?). I suspect that most reasonable people would find that far less objectionable than not being "unarrested" and the LEO/Courts would find that far more defensible. No need to say "I/we fouled up", just sorry for the inconvience, feel free to contact my superior at xxx-yyyy, but we are just trying to keep you safe. If it helps a piece of paper like you say for the record and cut 'em loose. Not saying to use this as a way to throw a bigger net just no need to take anyone you may intially find suspect downtown...